Author Topic: Request: EA_OnPreChange events (Read 6308 times)

Uffe · « **on:** January 13, 2012, 03:16:00 am »

Hi!

In an Add-In, to stop the modeller from modelling incorrectly, you can catch EA_OnPreNew and EA_OnPreDelete events.
At the moment, however, there are no EA_OnPreChange events. These are also needed if the Add-In is to have a fighting chance to maintain model integrity.

Looking at the existing EA_OnPre events, I would rank the change events in order of priority thus:
EA_OnPreChangeElement
EA_OnPreChangeConnector
EA_OnPreChangePackage
EA_OnPreChangeAttribute
EA_OnPreChangeMethod
EA_OnPreChangeDiagram
EA_OnPreChangeDiagramObject
EA_OnPreChangeGlossaryTerm

Anyone else?

Cheers,

/Uffe

qwerty · « **Reply #1 on:** January 13, 2012, 07:21:24 am »

Why not have a general OnPreChange (element) which passes the according object?

q.

Geert Bellekens · « **Reply #2 on:** January 13, 2012, 05:09:09 pm »

Isn't that what EA_OnNotifyContextItemModified does?

Geert

Uffe · « **Reply #3 on:** January 13, 2012, 07:27:51 pm »

No, OnNotifyContextItemModified corresponds roughly to the OnPostNew events, whereas the OnPreNew and OnPreDelete events are functions returning Booleans, giving the Add-In the ability to block the change by returning False.

Also, I'm pretty sure OnNotifyContextItemModified only informs of items changed through the GUI (the context), not changes done through scripts etc.

A generic OnPreChange() would be a different way of achieving the same thing, but it would be a different design from the existing OnPre and OnPost events. The merits of one over the other can be argued, but konsistency is cey in my book.

qwerty · « **Reply #4 on:** January 13, 2012, 10:23:28 pm »

Quote

konsistency is cey

This is in line with the general EA design.

q.

Paolo F Cantoni · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2012, 02:18:02 pm »

Quote

Quote
konsistency is cey
This is in line with the general EA design.

q.

Careful Uffe, you might be infringing on my trade mark:
Consistency, Consistency, Consistency! ^TM

Paolo

Uffe · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2012, 06:05:25 pm »

Yes - 'cept of course I'd have gone with
Concistency, konsistency, consistensy!
just because.

Buuuut anyway. Good? Bad? Useless?

/Uffe

qwerty · « **Reply #7 on:** January 18, 2012, 05:19:06 am »

Again OT: How is it this thread has an asterisk in the list???

q.

Paolo F Cantoni · « **Reply #8 on:** January 23, 2012, 03:23:27 pm »

Quote

Yes - 'cept of course I'd have gone with
Concistency, konsistency, consistensy!
just because.

Buuuut anyway. Good? Bad? Useless?

/Uffe

Soo COOL! Uffe! I'm going to snaffle it - with attribution, of course as in:
Concistency, konsistency, consistensy! ^TM_{Uffe - after Paolo}

Paolo.

Sparx Systems Forum

News: